DTWorld wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

DTWorld wrote:

https://www.flightradar24.com/AFR378/10d6050a

F-HRBB is currently en route as the inaugural AF 789 service to DTW. Current ETA is 18:23. I would love to see the 787 be a regular here.

RJ flies it in twice every week. There will be 2 787's on property at the same time today.

True, but again RJ is only 2x weekly versus the AF flight arriving/departing on a daily basis. Also, it's highly unlikely I will ever set foot in Jordan whereas I'm far more likely to go through CDG. For as much as I can't stand that airport over AMS, I'd be willing to suffer a bit if it meant getting a 787 ride in and/or out of my home airport.

Might have to ZED fare to CDG and onward to Germany just to take the 789!

NWADTWE16 wrote:

where did you look at load factors? GRR-DTW and the return has always been packed every flight all day, every day since before I started with NW in 96. I'd be surprised if those people are gunning for ATL and what routes are making them do that? perhaps those routes are needed from DTW. Its a large amount of people from GRR

DL's shifted capacity away from DTW/GRR. In the 2000s, DTW reigned as the #1 transit point from GRR, moving 235K-240K passengers annually. By 2017, DTW had dropped to #3, transiting 174K passengers ... despite the fact that traffic at GRR had soared by over 1M passengers. Meanwhile, traffic via ATL grew from 57K pre-merger to 181K, surpassing DTW.

2007 GRR transit stats (pre-merger):
DTW, 234K
MSP, 134K
CVG, 61K
ATL, 57K

2017 GRR transit stats
ATL, 181K
DTW, 174K
MSP, 152K

- - -

The growth at GRR, BTW, is proof the WN effect still exists. Of course, the a.net naysayers are the same ones who believe Walmart is no longer an 800 lb. gorilla in B&M pricing because Kroger, etc. have matched their prices...

727NWA wrote:

Bit of an odd question but I didn't think it warranted it's own thread.

Does anyone have pictures of the inside of the old NW concourses in the Davey and Smith terminals or any good aerial images of it? Found a few aerials but interior pictures seem exceedingly hard to find.

They're very rare, especially those from the 1990s (the build-out and height of the NW hub). I've posted some in prior editions of this thread and I may have others to share. I also filmed a very comprehensive video of the airport complex from circa 1995, but I was barely a teenager and as it was intended for personal use, it's filled with foolish antics. Given the scarcity of material from that time, and repeated requests for such, I know the video will draw plenty of interest, therefore it will require extensive editing before I'm willing to share it. Stay tuned... Additionally, the local news stations provided extensive coverage on the closing of the Davey Terminal. Somebody interested enough could contact them to see if they can get a copy from the archives (it probably won't be easy or cheap, I'm assuming).

compensateme wrote:

727NWA wrote:

Bit of an odd question but I didn't think it warranted it's own thread.

Does anyone have pictures of the inside of the old NW concourses in the Davey and Smith terminals or any good aerial images of it? Found a few aerials but interior pictures seem exceedingly hard to find.

They're very rare, especially those from the 1990s (the build-out and height of the NW hub). I've posted some in prior editions of this thread and I may have others to share. I also filmed a very comprehensive video of the airport complex from circa 1995, but I was barely a teenager and as it was intended for personal use, it's filled with foolish antics. Given the scarcity of material from that time, and repeated requests for such, I know the video will draw plenty of interest, therefore it will require extensive editing before I'm willing to share it. Stay tuned... Additionally, the local news stations provided extensive coverage on the closing of the Davey Terminal. Somebody interested enough could contact them to see if they can get a copy from the archives (it probably won't be easy or cheap, I'm assuming).

The only one I've been able to find is a 400px image from Pinterest. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/531002612293127595/
That's assuming it's even accurate.

I've searched for local news articles but haven't reached out to any of them. It's just my own personal curiosity as I had passed through DTW when I was younger in the early/mid 90s and don't remember much of it.

I'll stay tuned for the video

What I find fascinating about a.net: Chicagoland lead the nation in population loss in 2015 & 2016 (and preliminary numbers indicate 2017 as well) and has seen discretionary income fall while it rose in most rest of the nation. Local enplanments have barely grown and the push is almost exclusively by ULCC. Meanwhile, over the past year, ORD has gained more new service than any other domestic airport and is embarking on an $8.5B expansion plan -- one characterized by a.net as "much needed," even though Chicagoland is no where close to being undeserved.

Meanwhile, over the same time period, Metro Detroit has had small population growth, above average growth in discretionary income and average fares trending 17%-23% higher than ORD. But how dare us start a thread pondering if a second legacy will start DTW-LAX -- we're lucky ANY airline serves the route; heck,we're lucky any airline serves DTW, period. And discussion of the resumption of HKG? Forget about it -- DL needs the plane to be the fourth carrier operating the sixth flight in a market from SEA that's twice the size that of DTW.

Don't get me wrong -- I understand as much as anybody why ORD is expanding. But, a troll or so aside, it's frustrating when a group of people are having a legitimate conversation only to have their thread hijacked by the stereotypical a.net user, who can't build or comprehend an argument without mentioning the standard population and "what I think is wealthy" arguments.

Typical a.netter: Orange County, CA screwed up in not building a new airport at El Toro because it has a large population and everybody's rich and it could support my fantasy Delta hub, complete with 787 that have Apple IFE systems.
Reality: Uh, did you know that LA and Orange County are experiencing the largest increases in poverty and homeless populations in the country? Did you know that 100K people are expected move out of state this year, a combination of those cashing in on high real estate and those who can no longer afford to live there?
Typical a.net user: Uh, I watched The OC so I think I know what I'm talking about! And I'm an expert, because I did an internship in Delta Tech Ops 5 years ago, even though I've stocked shelves at Publix Supermarket since. Now excuse me, I'm going back to arguing about why I think DL is the best at taking care of dogs!!!

compensateme wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

where did you look at load factors? GRR-DTW and the return has always been packed every flight all day, every day since before I started with NW in 96. I'd be surprised if those people are gunning for ATL and what routes are making them do that? perhaps those routes are needed from DTW. Its a large amount of people from GRR

DL's shifted capacity away from DTW/GRR. In the 2000s, DTW reigned as the #1 transit point from GRR, moving 235K-240K passengers annually. By 2017, DTW had dropped to #3, transiting 174K passengers ... despite the fact that traffic at GRR had soared by over 1M passengers. Meanwhile, traffic via ATL grew from 57K pre-merger to 181K, surpassing DTW.

2007 GRR transit stats (pre-merger):
DTW, 234K
MSP, 134K
CVG, 61K
ATL, 57K

2017 GRR transit stats
ATL, 181K
DTW, 174K
MSP, 152K

- - -

The growth at GRR, BTW, is proof the WN effect still exists. Of course, the a.net naysayers are the same ones who believe Walmart is no longer an 800 lb. gorilla in B&M pricing because Kroger, etc. have matched their prices...

Those are some amazing numbers right there and further valuates what I have been saying about all the lost revenue for DTW because of Delta diverting traffic away from DTW and over ATL not only GRR but how many enplanements were lost when they dropped FNT-DTW making ATL your only option short of driving to Detroit. The leakage is real and it's costing the airport millions.

I know I have some old photo prints somewhere in a box from back in the 90s as well when I used to go there in high school and watch airplanes. Back in the pre-9/11 era being able to go through security, it was thing I'd go and do for fun. Concourse F was always a good time in the early afternoons with all the DC-10s and 747s and general mass chaos of the overcrowded concourse.

Old pictures of DTW Smith/Davey/Berry terminals.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/531002612295969204/ Smith 1950s
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/547750373404765034/ Smith 1960s
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/531002612 ... mith/Tower mid-70s
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/531002612300339705/ Smith late 90s/early 2000s
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/547750373398472531/ Smith in early-2000s
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/531002612300339706/ Smith ~early 2000s

As shown earlier:
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/531002612293127595/ Davey Concourse E, late 90's, pretty stereotypical of how the last renovation by NW in the 90s looked; MSP Concourse F feels very similar to the old DTW Davey concourses.

compensateme, here are some of your old photos, including
DTW Davey Concourse G (aka the Golfcourse, or Mesaba-land)
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1355717&start=1050#p19771619

flymco753 wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

where did you look at load factors? GRR-DTW and the return has always been packed every flight all day, every day since before I started with NW in 96. I'd be surprised if those people are gunning for ATL and what routes are making them do that? perhaps those routes are needed from DTW. Its a large amount of people from GRR

DL is pushing a ton of GRR connections via ATL with the exception of Northeast travel. Everything from GRR-ATL-LHR to GRR-ATL-LAX are all going through Atlanta per the trend.

And this is the kind of nonsense that keeps Detroit-London from being double daily when it could be sustainable . I wonder if anyone at Delta has crunched all the extra money spent on extra fuel burn routing passengers out of their way to make just so they can connect in Atlanta.

Six years ago today LOL

https://www.thepetitionsite.com/669/463 ... C-Kn-B7zFM

klm617 wrote:

Six years ago today LOL

https://www.thepetitionsite.com/669/463 ... C-Kn-B7zFM

EK is adding more seats to their 77L's so maybe they think it's too many seats, I'd disagree if that were the case, they could fly a 77W in no problem.

klm617 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

where did you look at load factors? GRR-DTW and the return has always been packed every flight all day, every day since before I started with NW in 96. I'd be surprised if those people are gunning for ATL and what routes are making them do that? perhaps those routes are needed from DTW. Its a large amount of people from GRR

DL is pushing a ton of GRR connections via ATL with the exception of Northeast travel. Everything from GRR-ATL-LHR to GRR-ATL-LAX are all going through Atlanta per the trend.

And this is the kind of nonsense that keeps Detroit-London from being double daily when it could be sustainable . I wonder if anyone at Delta has crunched all the extra money spent on extra fuel burn routing passengers out of their way to make just so they can connect in Atlanta.

I'm not sure if you've realized it, but there's still plenty of long-haul capacity flowing through Detroit. Most of that capacity, in line with the NW legacy, is TPAC.
Atlanta, on the other hand, has mostly domestic routes with healthy TATL and some TPAC.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

DL is pushing a ton of GRR connections via ATL with the exception of Northeast travel. Everything from GRR-ATL-LHR to GRR-ATL-LAX are all going through Atlanta per the trend.

And this is the kind of nonsense that keeps Detroit-London from being double daily when it could be sustainable . I wonder if anyone at Delta has crunched all the extra money spent on extra fuel burn routing passengers out of their way to make just so they can connect in Atlanta.

I'm not sure if you've realized it, but there's still plenty of long-haul capacity flowing through Detroit. Most of that capacity, in line with the NW legacy, is TPAC.
Atlanta, on the other hand, has mostly domestic routes with healthy TATL and some TPAC.

Actually the Detroit London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt capacity is down from the NWA days FRA and London operated 3 daily in the summer and two throughout the winter and ANS was 5 daily at it's peak and yes the winter month were stable at 3 Daily. Asoa capacity is also down with NWA operating 5 747's in the summer and always at least 4 747's year round.

klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

And this is the kind of nonsense that keeps Detroit-London from being double daily when it could be sustainable . I wonder if anyone at Delta has crunched all the extra money spent on extra fuel burn routing passengers out of their way to make just so they can connect in Atlanta.

I'm not sure if you've realized it, but there's still plenty of long-haul capacity flowing through Detroit. Most of that capacity, in line with the NW legacy, is TPAC.
Atlanta, on the other hand, has mostly domestic routes with healthy TATL and some TPAC.

Actually the Detroit London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt capacity is down from the NWA days FRA and London operated 3 daily in the summer and two throughout the winter and ANS was 5 daily at it's peak and yes the winter month were stable at 3 Daily. Asoa capacity is also down with NWA operating 5 747's in the summer and always at least 4 747's year round.

It's down because the combined Delta does things differently now. Detroit's primary purpose (and task it specializes in) within the long haul network is connecting the east coast and some of the Midwest to Asia. Its TATL network, which was not up to par with Delta's ATL and JFK networks, is de-emphasized in favor of TPAC.
Delta has good reasons for its business model, believe me. No grudges.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

I'm not sure if you've realized it, but there's still plenty of long-haul capacity flowing through Detroit. Most of that capacity, in line with the NW legacy, is TPAC.
Atlanta, on the other hand, has mostly domestic routes with healthy TATL and some TPAC.

Actually the Detroit London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt capacity is down from the NWA days FRA and London operated 3 daily in the summer and two throughout the winter and ANS was 5 daily at it's peak and yes the winter month were stable at 3 Daily. Asoa capacity is also down with NWA operating 5 747's in the summer and always at least 4 747's year round.

It's down because the combined Delta does things differently now. Detroit's primary purpose (and task it specializes in) within the long haul network is connecting the east coast and some of the Midwest to Asia. Its TATL network, which was not up to par with Delta's ATL and JFK networks, is de-emphasized in favor of TPAC.
Delta has good reasons for its business model, believe me. No grudges.

That maybe all true but their business plan is impacting the airport in a very negative way. I have no problem with the airport protecting Delta's interest at the airport if Delta was fully committed to growing the market year after year but that's not the case so it's time for the airport to force Delta's hand and pursue other options at the airport to expand service to be at the level it should be with other airports serving metro areas of the same size.

klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

so it's time for the airport to force Delta's hand and pursue other options at the airport to expand service to be at the level it should be with other airports serving metro areas of the same size.

Here's a list with the populations of metro areas similar to SE Michigan: (I added ATL because they are the subject of your usual anti DL/Wayne County rants.)

9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 5,789,700
10 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,794,447
11 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,679,166
12 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,661,537
13 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,527,837
14 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,297,617
15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,798,902
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,551,036

So am I missing something here?

Where is DTW's level of service deficient against these markets of a similar size?

Many of them have an advantage in one market or another.....But overall, I fail to see how DTW has a "service level" significantly less than these other similarly sized markets.

I can tell you this, after flying through BOS, SFO, and PHX in the last few weeks, I can positively state that the DTW facilities surpass these three airports in passenger convenience, and in many instances, flight schedules. And my Uber driver couldn't even find me in PHX because of the confusing mess of terminals and drop off areas. You are lucky to have the facilities and DL network in DTW vs the mess found in Boston and PHX for example. The 4.5m folks in the Inland Empire/ONT have lousy connections. And it's a two hour drive to LAX from San Burno. (I used to live in LA, so I know)

You don't know how lucky you are.

klm617 wrote:

[Actually the Detroit London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt capacity is down from the NWA days FRA and London operated 3 daily in the summer and two throughout the winter and ANS was 5 daily at it's peak and yes the winter month were stable at 3 Daily. Asoa capacity is also down with NWA operating 5 747's in the summer and always at least 4 747's year round.

NW never operated LGW 3x daily. The route briefly operated 2x daily in the late 1990s/early 2000s (and there may have been seasonal suspensions of one of the flights) but double daily service was never attempted after 9-11. To their credit, DL has tried double-daily DTW/LHR services on multiple occasions -- including service operated by VS -- but service has been a disaster, with LF frequently among the lowest of any US - LHR flight.

Don't forget that CDG -- a market NW operated only seasonally in its final years -- is now 3x daily (AF wouldn't otherwise be here). FCO, MUC and some additional LHR frequency were also added.

Blame NW for the lack of Atlantic service. NW was content on the AMS hub and not at all interested in secondary routes (besides its short-lived 757 experiment). NW may have been able to leverage the DTW hub to create an Atlantic gateway -- similar to how US turned CLT into a Caribbean gateway -- but lacked the equipment and such service is very volatile. Outside the summer months, you could fly to Europe cheaper than SFO...

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

I'm not sure if you've realized it, but there's still plenty of long-haul capacity flowing through Detroit. Most of that capacity, in line with the NW legacy, is TPAC.Atlanta, on the other hand, has mostly domestic routes with healthy TATL and some TPAC.

DL leveraged its hub and surplus 767 equipment to turn ATL in the largest transfer gateway across the Atlantic; the breadth of service is larger than you realize. And you're right -- DTW's t-pac gateway reigns from its NW heritage. Now that the 747 are gone and 359 coming on property, I'd look for ATL to surpass DTW in that regard a few years from now...

beerbus wrote:

Where is DTW's level of service deficient against these markets of a similar size?

Many of them have an advantage in one market or another.....But overall, I fail to see how DTW has a "service level" significantly less than these other similarly sized markets.

I can tell you this, after flying through BOS, SFO, and PHX in the last few weeks, I can positively state that the DTW facilities surpass these three airports in passenger convenience, and in many instances, flight schedules. And my Uber driver couldn't even find me in PHX because of the confusing mess of terminals and drop off areas. You are lucky to have the facilities and DL network in DTW vs the mess found in Boston and PHX for example. The 4.5m folks in the Inland Empire/ONT have lousy connections. And it's a two hour drive to LAX from San Burno. (I used to live in LA, so I know)

You don't know how lucky you are.

I'm only responding because I'm tired of the perpetual "population" arguments.

#1) Population is loosely correlated to air service. Please tell me why DEN -- a metro area with less than 3 million people -- is now the fifth largest airport (by traffic) in the USA, despite being the 20th largest metro area in size? Hint: it's not because everybody in DEN is rich or it's a "booming" market (air traffic has been increasing much faster than the rate of population growth). Or why CLT, with half as many people -- AND HALF THE LOCAL ENPLANEMENTS -- has nearly 15M more passengers than DTW?

#2) MSA statistics are deceitful. The lion's share of the Inland Empire's population is on the fringes of LA/Orange/SD counties -- within easy driving distance of LAX & SAN. Waze (based on real driving data) shows the drive from ONT (since the population east of ONT is insignificant) to LAX to be 50-90 minutes, depending on the time of departure. And the drive from Northern Oakland or Northern Macomb counties ito DTW s.... 50-90 minutes. Oh, those poor, poor souls in the IE!!!!!!

compensateme wrote:

klm617 wrote:

[Actually the Detroit London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt capacity is down from the NWA days FRA and London operated 3 daily in the summer and two throughout the winter and ANS was 5 daily at it's peak and yes the winter month were stable at 3 Daily. Asoa capacity is also down with NWA operating 5 747's in the summer and always at least 4 747's year round.

NW never operated LGW 3x daily. The route briefly operated 2x daily in the late 1990s/early 2000s (and there may have been seasonal suspensions of one of the flights) but double daily service was never attempted after 9-11. To their credit, DL has tried double-daily DTW/LHR services on multiple occasions -- including service operated by VS -- but service has been a disaster, with LF frequently among the lowest of any US - LHR flight.

Don't forget that CDG -- a market NW operated only seasonally in its final years -- is now 3x daily (AF wouldn't otherwise be here). FCO, MUC and some additional LHR frequency were also added.

Blame NW for the lack of Atlantic service. NW was content on the AMS hub and not at all interested in secondary routes (besides its short-lived 757 experiment). NW may have been able to leverage the DTW hub to create an Atlantic gateway -- similar to how US turned CLT into a Caribbean gateway -- but lacked the equipment and such service is very volatile. Outside the summer months, you could fly to Europe cheaper than SFO...

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

I'm not sure if you've realized it, but there's still plenty of long-haul capacity flowing through Detroit. Most of that capacity, in line with the NW legacy, is TPAC.Atlanta, on the other hand, has mostly domestic routes with healthy TATL and some TPAC.

DL leveraged its hub and surplus 767 equipment to turn ATL in the largest transfer gateway across the Atlantic; the breadth of service is larger than you realize. And you're right -- DTW's t-pac gateway reigns from its NW heritage. Now that the 747 are gone and 359 coming on property, I'd look for ATL to surpass DTW in that regard a few years from now...

There were 2 daily NW flights and one daily BA flight and the reason Detroit London is struggling is because everyone from the upper Midwest is routed over ATL rather than Detroit. Yes I agree I think ATL will pass Detroit as far as Asia capacity goes.

beerbus wrote:

klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

Here's a list with the populations of metro areas similar to SE Michigan: (I added ATL because they are the subject of your usual anti DL/Wayne County rants.)

9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 5,789,700
10 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,794,447
11 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,679,166
12 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,661,537
13 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,527,837
14 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,297,617
15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,798,902
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,551,036

So am I missing something here?

Where is DTW's level of service deficient against these markets of a similar size?

Many of them have an advantage in one market or another.....But overall, I fail to see how DTW has a "service level" significantly less than these other similarly sized markets.

I can tell you this, after flying through BOS, SFO, and PHX in the last few weeks, I can positively state that the DTW facilities surpass these three airports in passenger convenience, and in many instances, flight schedules. And my Uber driver couldn't even find me in PHX because of the confusing mess of terminals and drop off areas. You are lucky to have the facilities and DL network in DTW vs the mess found in Boston and PHX for example. The 4.5m folks in the Inland Empire/ONT have lousy connections. And it's a two hour drive to LAX from San Burno. (I used to live in LA, so I know)

You don't know how lucky you are.

Thank you for validating my point all the airports you list are ahead of Detroit by leaps and bounds as far as selection of flights and destinations served so yes Detroit is below where it should be according to your list.

klm617 wrote:

beerbus wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Here's a list with the populations of metro areas similar to SE Michigan: (I added ATL because they are the subject of your usual anti DL/Wayne County rants.)

9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 5,789,700
10 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,794,447
11 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,679,166
12 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,661,537
13 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,527,837
14 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,297,617
15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,798,902
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,551,036

So am I missing something here?

Where is DTW's level of service deficient against these markets of a similar size?

Many of them have an advantage in one market or another.....But overall, I fail to see how DTW has a "service level" significantly less than these other similarly sized markets.

I can tell you this, after flying through BOS, SFO, and PHX in the last few weeks, I can positively state that the DTW facilities surpass these three airports in passenger convenience, and in many instances, flight schedules. And my Uber driver couldn't even find me in PHX because of the confusing mess of terminals and drop off areas. You are lucky to have the facilities and DL network in DTW vs the mess found in Boston and PHX for example. The 4.5m folks in the Inland Empire/ONT have lousy connections. And it's a two hour drive to LAX from San Burno. (I used to live in LA, so I know)

You don't know how lucky you are.

Thank you for validating my point all the airports you list are ahead of Detroit by leaps and bounds as far as selection of flights and destinations served so yes Detroit is below where it should be according to your list.

It's not leaps and bounds at all. Detroit has it better than Philly by raw numbers, and the selection of destinations offered from DTW is just as good if not better than PHX or BOS. To top it off, DTW's terminals make more sense than most American airports.

The point is that Detroit has it better than you seem to realize, so you should stop inventing conspiracies and whining so much.

Detroit is going to be an untapped market by 2020, I'd say by 2025 the airport will have DL and FI to KEF, DL and EI to DUB, BA to LHR, and DL to BCN, which is the least likely but still very possible as that market develops.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

beerbus wrote:

Here's a list with the populations of metro areas similar to SE Michigan: (I added ATL because they are the subject of your usual anti DL/Wayne County rants.)

9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 5,789,700
10 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,794,447
11 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,679,166
12 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,661,537
13 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,527,837
14 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,297,617
15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,798,902
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,551,036

So am I missing something here?

Where is DTW's level of service deficient against these markets of a similar size?

Many of them have an advantage in one market or another.....But overall, I fail to see how DTW has a "service level" significantly less than these other similarly sized markets.

I can tell you this, after flying through BOS, SFO, and PHX in the last few weeks, I can positively state that the DTW facilities surpass these three airports in passenger convenience, and in many instances, flight schedules. And my Uber driver couldn't even find me in PHX because of the confusing mess of terminals and drop off areas. You are lucky to have the facilities and DL network in DTW vs the mess found in Boston and PHX for example. The 4.5m folks in the Inland Empire/ONT have lousy connections. And it's a two hour drive to LAX from San Burno. (I used to live in LA, so I know)

You don't know how lucky you are.

Thank you for validating my point all the airports you list are ahead of Detroit by leaps and bounds as far as selection of flights and destinations served so yes Detroit is below where it should be according to your list.

It's not leaps and bounds at all. Detroit has it better than Philly by raw numbers, and the selection of destinations offered from DTW is just as good if not better than PHX or BOS. To top it off, DTW's terminals make more sense than most American airports.

The point is that Detroit has it better than you seem to realize, so you should stop inventing conspiracies and whining so much.

Detroit is not even close to BOS and PHL has more carriers than Detroit has no to mention way more international service. PHX has 2 hub carriers with more flights passengers and destinations than Detroit does. Every airport on your list is higher than Detroit on the over all list as far a passengers go. At this rate will slip out of the top 20 airports in the country and that's pretty sad being it's a major hub for one of the US3. I would say out of all hubs in the USA it would be the smallest of all the major hubs in the country. I understand it's no New York, Chicago or LA but it should be keeping pace with the over all increase in airline traffic which it is not.

flymco753 wrote:

Detroit is going to be an untapped market by 2020, I'd say by 2025 the airport will have DL and FI to KEF, DL and EI to DUB, BA to LHR, and DL to BCN, which is the least likely but still very possible as that market develops.

LOL in 5 years we'll be using 2030 as a projected date the time is now because that's when the expansion is going on just like the time was 5 years ago for landing one of the ME3 carriers when they were expanding sadly an opportunity that the airport missed because of poor marketing and lack of commitment to make it happen.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

beerbus wrote:

Here's a list with the populations of metro areas similar to SE Michigan: (I added ATL because they are the subject of your usual anti DL/Wayne County rants.)

9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA Metropolitan Statistical Area 5,789,700
10 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,794,447
11 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,679,166
12 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,661,537
13 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,527,837
14 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metropolitan Statistical Area 4,297,617
15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,798,902
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metropolitan Statistical Area 3,551,036

So am I missing something here?

Where is DTW's level of service deficient against these markets of a similar size?

Many of them have an advantage in one market or another.....But overall, I fail to see how DTW has a "service level" significantly less than these other similarly sized markets.

I can tell you this, after flying through BOS, SFO, and PHX in the last few weeks, I can positively state that the DTW facilities surpass these three airports in passenger convenience, and in many instances, flight schedules. And my Uber driver couldn't even find me in PHX because of the confusing mess of terminals and drop off areas. You are lucky to have the facilities and DL network in DTW vs the mess found in Boston and PHX for example. The 4.5m folks in the Inland Empire/ONT have lousy connections. And it's a two hour drive to LAX from San Burno. (I used to live in LA, so I know)

You don't know how lucky you are.

Thank you for validating my point all the airports you list are ahead of Detroit by leaps and bounds as far as selection of flights and destinations served so yes Detroit is below where it should be according to your list.

Metro area population doesnt determine air demand.

Really then Detroit should have more traffic than ORD, NYC and LAX according to you theory.

It's the local businesses that demand air service NOT population. it really depends on what the local population is employed in...

O&D numbers are more important, and unfortunately DTW underrepresents for its population. All of posted comparably sized population centers are also larger O&D markets, due to a number of factors.

Jeremy

klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Thank you for validating my point all the airports you list are ahead of Detroit by leaps and bounds as far as selection of flights and destinations served so yes Detroit is below where it should be according to your list.

It's not leaps and bounds at all. Detroit has it better than Philly by raw numbers, and the selection of destinations offered from DTW is just as good if not better than PHX or BOS. To top it off, DTW's terminals make more sense than most American airports.

The point is that Detroit has it better than you seem to realize, so you should stop inventing conspiracies and whining so much.

Detroit is not even close to BOS and PHL has more carriers than Detroit has no to mention way more international service. PHX has 2 hub carriers with more flights passengers and destinations than Detroit does. Every airport on your list is higher than Detroit on the over all list as far a passengers go. At this rate will slip out of the top 20 airports in the country and that's pretty sad being it's a major hub for one of the US3. I would say out of all hubs in the USA it would be the smallest of all the major hubs in the country. I understand it's no New York, Chicago or LA but it should be keeping pace with the over all increase in airline traffic which it is not.

On the actual overall list, Detroit is larger than Philly. Factually, statistically, DTW has more passengers going through it in a year than PHL.
DTW is also a Delta fortress hub, so it is far from being the smallest hub. Factually, statistically, it is either Delta's 2nd or 3rd largest.
DTW is bigger than you think it is, growing faster than you think it is, but not the bottomless well of cash you think it is.

SESGDL wrote:

O&D numbers are more important, and unfortunately DTW underrepresents for its population. All of posted comparably sized population centers are also larger O&D markets, due to a number of factors.

Jeremy

More perpetual a.net fallacies. O/D is -- at best -- loosely tied to population. Consider MSP -- O/D growth has far lagged that of local population growth over the past 10 years -- even staggering considering that the market went from having amongst the least amount of low cost competition to amongst the most, as well as several legacy market battlegrounds.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

It's not leaps and bounds at all. Detroit has it better than Philly by raw numbers, and the selection of destinations offered from DTW is just as good if not better than PHX or BOS. To top it off, DTW's terminals make more sense than most American airports.

The point is that Detroit has it better than you seem to realize, so you should stop inventing conspiracies and whining so much.

Detroit is not even close to BOS and PHL has more carriers than Detroit has no to mention way more international service. PHX has 2 hub carriers with more flights passengers and destinations than Detroit does. Every airport on your list is higher than Detroit on the over all list as far a passengers go. At this rate will slip out of the top 20 airports in the country and that's pretty sad being it's a major hub for one of the US3. I would say out of all hubs in the USA it would be the smallest of all the major hubs in the country. I understand it's no New York, Chicago or LA but it should be keeping pace with the over all increase in airline traffic which it is not.

On the actual overall list, Detroit is larger than Philly. Factually, statistically, DTW has more passengers going through it in a year than PHL.
DTW is also a Delta fortress hub, so it is far from being the smallest hub. Factually, statistically, it is either Delta's 2nd or 3rd largest.
DTW is bigger than you think it is, growing faster than you think it is, but not the bottomless well of cash you think it is.

Possibly the only smaller hub in the US other than DTW is SLC. Let's stop making excuses to justify the lack of growth in this market and acknowledge that it's lagging behind all other majors airports and it's not because of O/D. population or wealth of the region so what do you suppose then might be holding Detroit back from realizing it's potential.

klm617 wrote:

Possibly the only smaller hub in the US other than DTW is SLC. Let's stop making excuses to justify the lack of growth in this market and acknowledge that it's lagging behind all other majors airports and it's not because of O/D. population or wealth of the region so what do you suppose then might be holding Detroit back from realizing it's potential.

Two airlines that could help DTW realize it's potential are UA and AA. But both have mega-hubs less than 300 miles away at ORD so they have no interest in helping DTW. To the contrary they steal traffic away from DTW, maybe not much O/D, but definitely connecting traffic. And the one airline that could turn DTW into another ORD is DL. But their first and only goal is to help ATL reach it's potential and if that has to happen at the expense of DTW, so be it. So DTW has two major carriers driving traffic to nearby hubs and one major carrier -- that is actually located at DTW -- driving traffic away from DTW to it's favorite hub. This means the potential DTW is searching for is getting LCC's like WN, NK, and F9 to add random routes hoping to make a couple of bucks per passenger. Not exactly the big growth and exciting announcements that other airports experience -- but that's life in a DL hub that is not ATL.

klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Detroit is not even close to BOS and PHL has more carriers than Detroit has no to mention way more international service. PHX has 2 hub carriers with more flights passengers and destinations than Detroit does. Every airport on your list is higher than Detroit on the over all list as far a passengers go. At this rate will slip out of the top 20 airports in the country and that's pretty sad being it's a major hub for one of the US3. I would say out of all hubs in the USA it would be the smallest of all the major hubs in the country. I understand it's no New York, Chicago or LA but it should be keeping pace with the over all increase in airline traffic which it is not.

On the actual overall list, Detroit is larger than Philly. Factually, statistically, DTW has more passengers going through it in a year than PHL.
DTW is also a Delta fortress hub, so it is far from being the smallest hub. Factually, statistically, it is either Delta's 2nd or 3rd largest.
DTW is bigger than you think it is, growing faster than you think it is, but not the bottomless well of cash you think it is.

Possibly the only smaller hub in the US other than DTW is SLC. Let's stop making excuses to justify the lack of growth in this market and acknowledge that it's lagging behind all other majors airports and it's not because of O/D. population or wealth of the region so what do you suppose then might be holding Detroit back from realizing it's potential.

Let's face it, you saying false facts over and over again doesn't make them true. DTW has more traffic than PHL, LGA, SLC, IAD, DCA, and PDX, among others. Given the share of the DL hub in Detroit, that hub is therefore bigger than:
The AA hub in PHL (not positive about that one)
The DL and AA hubs in LGA
The DL hub in SLC
The UA hub in IAD
The AA hub in DCA
The AS hub in PDX
And others.
If there's less O&D traffic at DTW, which other posters claim as well, then that's on Southeast Michigan, not on Delta. Just don't claim it's because you're underserved, because you ain't.

klm617 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

Detroit is going to be an untapped market by 2020, I'd say by 2025 the airport will have DL and FI to KEF, DL and EI to DUB, BA to LHR, and DL to BCN, which is the least likely but still very possible as that market develops.

LOL in 5 years we'll be using 2030 as a projected date the time is now because that's when the expansion is going on just like the time was 5 years ago for landing one of the ME3 carriers when they were expanding sadly an opportunity that the airport missed because of poor marketing and lack of commitment to make it happen.

2025 is reasonable, because Google is largely investing in the area and partnering with the automotive industry to help with the autonomous vehicles, that alone has a very large potential to generate traffic. What I see by 2025 is a lot of potential focused on South America and across the pond. I think there’s going to be a lot of Euro low cost service in a few years, if DI can somehow manage to get the A321LR from DTW to LGW, it WILL happen, and it WILL be one of the first few routes announced.

The slot restrictions, O/D, etc etc etc do not relate to the specific point he made and I refuted.
He said that the only hub smaller than DTW is SLC.
I said that's false, because all those hubs are smaller.
The fact that they are smaller because they're on the East Coast / Slot restrictions/ split-hub doesn't make Detroit smaller than they are, so my point stands as is.

These are my observations about air travel demand for DTW. Feel free to shoot holes in my observations and hypotheses:

There are many different demographics and socio-economic characteristics / segments of the population that have higher/lower propensity to travel. Like every market, DTW has strengths and weaknesses.

Strengths:
- Business travel from local business originating in DTW is heavily reliant on automotive industry related travel; manufacturers, suppliers, dealers, equipment providers, advertisers, and other industry related direct/in-direct suppliers.

- Automotive and manufacturing industry related ties help support service and generate demand to markets like BNA, CHA, DFW, STL, MCI, MEX, MTY, BJI, NRT, NGO, PVG, ICN, FRA, MUC, GRU; some of these markets would either have less capacity and/or not exist otherwise

- There is a decent-sized population of upper-middle class to upper class population of professionals, engineers, middle-managers, executives with higher than average incomes that travel on a periodic basis for business and leisure, that are less-discretionary related and less fare driven, that is likely very loyal to DL for their semi-frequent travel.

- Like other northern cities, DTW has a decent-sized snowbird/sun-related beach market travel during peak winter and spring break periods in Feb-Mar-Apr; leads to increased seasonal demand for carriers that have the ability to adjust seasonal capacity into such markets

Weaknesses:
- DTW lacks the depth and breadth or large professional service firms that have a significant number of (very) frequent fliers (E.g., large consultancies, IT consultants/implementation firms. Yes the large firms all have a presence but a fraction of the number of employees compared to the ORD, BOS, NYC, ATL, DFW, SFO, LAX markets. These are the weekly travelers, buying close-in/more expense fares, and J-class international fares.

- There is a very significant amount of intra-region automotive related business travel that choses to drive versus fly; there is a lot of travel between Metro Detroit and outlying assembly plants and supplier plants that simply drives to regions like SDF, LEX, BNA, IND, even STL. I know several people who drive back and forth from Louisville to DTW; its sort ingrained in the car culture and even encourage for low/mid-level employees to drive versus fly. The tipping-point for fly versus drive tends to be BNA and points south

- Leisure travel is heavily skewed to seasonal, discretionary related travel for the large demographic of middle class and/or blue-collar employment base of Metro Detroit. This would be the 1-3 times a year leisure travel, who tends to travel more when times are good, they get their bonus, and make a decision as to fly to Florida for a Spring Break trip versus put a new deck on their house. Highly decresionary, not brand-loyal, and travel heavily skewed toward peak travel periods.

- Metro Detroit has a relatively small convention / trade show related business that draws significant visitors from outside the region; with the exception a handful of automotive-industry related events per year

- Metro Detroit, despite the hype and buzz about redevelopment in the downtown/midtown area, is not a leisure destination on most people's radar, outside of regional interest. Its not a draw to visit a vibrant city for all but a very minor sub-set of people. It is not a tourist destination, yet.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

The slot restrictions, O/D, etc etc etc do not relate to the specific point he made and I refuted.
He said that the only hub smaller than DTW is SLC.
I said that's false, because all those hubs are smaller.
The fact that they are smaller because they're on the East Coast / Slot restrictions/ split-hub doesn't make Detroit smaller than they are, so my point stands as is.

You're stretching his argument / taking it out of context to make your point -- kinda like telling a hopeless romantic, who insists that nobody loves him, that he's wrong because his mom does.

But I digresses; the rationales presented within this thread are merely logical fallacies. klm is 100% correct -- DL leveraged traffic flows from DTW, and MSP to a lesser extent, to build ATL. But the primary reasons this was done are (1) ATL won the geographic lottery in terms of being a domestic "superhub," and (2) DTW is one of the highest yielding hubs in the country and DL is protecting that.

Like I said, it's tiring that the rationales on this forum are based more on logical fallacies and "truthiness" (Google the definion) than anything else; you've been arguing with him for a very long time, yet you have no idea what DTW's local traffic is or how it compares to its peers. Does that make any sense?

I just find it fascinating how the people within this thread using arguments similar to yours are now congratulating ORD for a "much needed" expansion, when ORD is the poster child of their argument against DTW.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

These are my observations about air travel demand for DTW. Feel free to shoot holes in my observations and hypotheses:

All good points. While places like MSP have long benefited from locals seeking to escape winter, Florida -- by far -- the #1 winter destination from Metro Detroit, and much of the traffic moves by car. My family never took road trips yet my brother's family travels to Central Florida by car several times per year -- he points out that it's an easy 17-hour drive straight through and only $300 in gas RT vs the $1500-$2000 it'd cost to fly and rent a car. (Cue the FlyerTalkers who will immediately poin out that they bill $1500-$2000 per hour of their time.)

One other point is that Michiganders historically travel within the state -- it's been awhile since I've seen that stats, but for many years we trailed only California in terms of the number of people vacationing within the state. For awhile I thought this trend would end, but the housing market is so hot in Northern Michigan that there's housing shortages in many communities.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

These are my observations about air travel demand for DTW. Feel free to shoot holes in my observations and hypotheses:

There are many different demographics and socio-economic characteristics / segments of the population that have higher/lower propensity to travel. Like every market, DTW has strengths and weaknesses.

Strengths:
- Business travel from local business originating in DTW is heavily reliant on automotive industry related travel; manufacturers, suppliers, dealers, equipment providers, advertisers, and other industry related direct/in-direct suppliers.

- Automotive and manufacturing industry related ties help support service and generate demand to markets like BNA, CHA, DFW, STL, MCI, MEX, MTY, BJI, NRT, NGO, PVG, ICN, FRA, MUC, GRU; some of these markets would either have less capacity and/or not exist otherwise

- There is a decent-sized population of upper-middle class to upper class population of professionals, engineers, middle-managers, executives with higher than average incomes that travel on a periodic basis for business and leisure, that are less-discretionary related and less fare driven, that is likely very loyal to DL for their semi-frequent travel.

- Like other northern cities, DTW has a decent-sized snowbird/sun-related beach market travel during peak winter and spring break periods in Feb-Mar-Apr; leads to increased seasonal demand for carriers that have the ability to adjust seasonal capacity into such markets

Weaknesses:
- DTW lacks the depth and breadth or large professional service firms that have a significant number of (very) frequent fliers (E.g., large consultancies, IT consultants/implementation firms. Yes the large firms all have a presence but a fraction of the number of employees compared to the ORD, BOS, NYC, ATL, DFW, SFO, LAX markets. These are the weekly travelers, buying close-in/more expense fares, and J-class international fares.

- There is a very significant amount of intra-region automotive related business travel that choses to drive versus fly; there is a lot of travel between Metro Detroit and outlying assembly plants and supplier plants that simply drives to regions like SDF, LEX, BNA, IND, even STL. I know several people who drive back and forth from Louisville to DTW; its sort ingrained in the car culture and even encourage for low/mid-level employees to drive versus fly. The tipping-point for fly versus drive tends to be BNA and points south

- Leisure travel is heavily skewed to seasonal, discretionary related travel for the large demographic of middle class and/or blue-collar employment base of Metro Detroit. This would be the 1-3 times a year leisure travel, who tends to travel more when times are good, they get their bonus, and make a decision as to fly to Florida for a Spring Break trip versus put a new deck on their house. Highly decresionary, not brand-loyal, and travel heavily skewed toward peak travel periods.

- Metro Detroit has a relatively small convention / trade show related business that draws significant visitors from outside the region; with the exception a handful of automotive-industry related events per year

- Metro Detroit, despite the hype and buzz about redevelopment in the downtown/midtown area, is not a leisure destination on most people's radar, outside of regional interest. Its not a draw to visit a vibrant city for all but a very minor sub-set of people. It is not a tourist destination, yet.

There is nothing to shoot holes in your points are all very valid the other thing I would add is the leakage to other surrounding airport that also steal passenger away from Detroit by their cheaper international fares and that is something the airport needs to address and by bring in those carriers as it will also force Delta's hand to expand in this market or they lose their foot hold and their ability to skew this market for what its good for them and not necessarily for the Detroit market over all. No one expects Detroit to land international route after route but there are so that should be served like DXB, DUB and competition on the London route. Detroit has had two flights to London daily since it's inception on O/D alone and now with a Delta hub here you mean to tell me there isn't enough traffic to support 2 dailies tear round that's called choking the market and hampering it's growth plain and simple. The longer tht Delta is allowed to play that game in Detroit the harder it's going to be to attract any new carriers in this market. I am do glad that Spirit is at least taking the Detroit market seriously again and adding flights that means their is a market there because all their additions are based on O/D numbers and not any sort of external feed.

Last night’s AF377 flight and today’s AF378 were cancelled. Did F-HRBC go tech in DTW?

compensateme wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

The slot restrictions, O/D, etc etc etc do not relate to the specific point he made and I refuted.
He said that the only hub smaller than DTW is SLC.
I said that's false, because all those hubs are smaller.
The fact that they are smaller because they're on the East Coast / Slot restrictions/ split-hub doesn't make Detroit smaller than they are, so my point stands as is.

You're stretching his argument / taking it out of context to make your point -- kinda like telling a hopeless romantic, who insists that nobody loves him, that he's wrong because his mom does.

But I digresses; the rationales presented within this thread are merely logical fallacies. klm is 100% correct -- DL leveraged traffic flows from DTW, and MSP to a lesser extent, to build ATL. But the primary reasons this was done are (1) ATL won the geographic lottery in terms of being a domestic "superhub," and (2) DTW is one of the highest yielding hubs in the country and DL is protecting that.

Like I said, it's tiring that the rationales on this forum are based more on logical fallacies and "truthiness" (Google the definion) than anything else; you've been arguing with him for a very long time, yet you have no idea what DTW's local traffic is or how it compares to its peers. Does that make any sense?

I just find it fascinating how the people within this thread using arguments similar to yours are now congratulating ORD for a "much needed" expansion, when ORD is the poster child of their argument against DTW.

And the whole shift of capacity out of MSP and DTW to ATL was based on the premise that we've mentioned many times before that DL's strategy for its ATL superhub was to increase capacity but with more seats per departure and fewer departures than where it was pre-merger. They want to pump as many flights/capacity through ATL as possible on large-narrowbody aircraft (160-190 seats/departure) since its lower on a CASM-basis. Its a strategy they are using to maximize network profitability, and frankly its worked for them.

compensateme wrote:

SESGDL wrote:

O&D numbers are more important, and unfortunately DTW underrepresents for its population. All of posted comparably sized population centers are also larger O&D markets, due to a number of factors.

Jeremy

More perpetual a.net fallacies. O/D is -- at best -- loosely tied to population. Consider MSP -- O/D growth has far lagged that of local population growth over the past 10 years -- even staggering considering that the market went from having amongst the least amount of low cost competition to amongst the most, as well as several legacy market battlegrounds.

And what does that have to do with DTW having lower O&D than markets of similar size? No fallacy at all. Larger O&D markets get more service, plain and simple. Not sure why every response to one of my posts has to involve MSP (and MSP still has more O&D than DTW and carried more passengers, while being a smaller metro area, sorry... ). It's a reason why DTW is the new MIA of a.net. Every thread devolves into a bitter back and forth.

Jeremy

ikolkyo wrote:

Last night’s AF377 flight and today’s AF378 were cancelled. Did F-HRBC go tech in DTW?

More likely it was because of the strike called for today.

I don’t think Emirates doesn’t want to fly to Detroit, I think they’re a little apprehensive because they’re trying to get into a market where travel to Dubai is almost nonexistent, yet they want to completely rely of connections to India on a high density aircraft.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

compensateme wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

The slot restrictions, O/D, etc etc etc do not relate to the specific point he made and I refuted.
He said that the only hub smaller than DTW is SLC.
I said that's false, because all those hubs are smaller.
The fact that they are smaller because they're on the East Coast / Slot restrictions/ split-hub doesn't make Detroit smaller than they are, so my point stands as is.

You're stretching his argument / taking it out of context to make your point -- kinda like telling a hopeless romantic, who insists that nobody loves him, that he's wrong because his mom does.

But I digresses; the rationales presented within this thread are merely logical fallacies. klm is 100% correct -- DL leveraged traffic flows from DTW, and MSP to a lesser extent, to build ATL. But the primary reasons this was done are (1) ATL won the geographic lottery in terms of being a domestic "superhub," and (2) DTW is one of the highest yielding hubs in the country and DL is protecting that.

Like I said, it's tiring that the rationales on this forum are based more on logical fallacies and "truthiness" (Google the definion) than anything else; you've been arguing with him for a very long time, yet you have no idea what DTW's local traffic is or how it compares to its peers. Does that make any sense?

I just find it fascinating how the people within this thread using arguments similar to yours are now congratulating ORD for a "much needed" expansion, when ORD is the poster child of their argument against DTW.

And the whole shift of capacity out of MSP and DTW to ATL was based on the premise that we've mentioned many times before that DL's strategy for its ATL superhub was to increase capacity but with more seats per departure and fewer departures than where it was pre-merger. They want to pump as many flights/capacity through ATL as possible on large-narrowbody aircraft (160-190 seats/departure) since its lower on a CASM-basis. Its a strategy they are using to maximize network profitability, and frankly its worked for them.

And that's all well and good that is why the WCAA has to look else where to grow the airport. Delta can do what ever it wants but the growth of the airport should not predicate on what is good for Delta. It's a proven fact that when a competitor comes into the market Delta ups it's game so if's time to start catering to other airlines and let Delta do what they need to do.

flymco753 wrote:

I don’t think Emirates doesn’t want to fly to Detroit, I think they’re a little apprehensive because they’re trying to get into a market where travel to Dubai is almost nonexistent, yet they want to completely rely of connections to India on a high density aircraft.

But it's not the DTW-DXB market they would cater too it's the beyond market that would be the bread and butter for EK. People going from Detroit to Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Eastern China. Let's be honest what do you expect the O/D to be from PHL-DOH, FLL-DXB or ATL-DOH these airline make their money on transit passengers and you'd be surprised how much they would stimulate the DTW-DXB market if they were to add a flight.

SESGDL wrote:

compensateme wrote:

SESGDL wrote:

O&D numbers are more important, and unfortunately DTW underrepresents for its population. All of posted comparably sized population centers are also larger O&D markets, due to a number of factors.

Jeremy

More perpetual a.net fallacies. O/D is -- at best -- loosely tied to population. Consider MSP -- O/D growth has far lagged that of local population growth over the past 10 years -- even staggering considering that the market went from having amongst the least amount of low cost competition to amongst the most, as well as several legacy market battlegrounds.

And what does that have to do with DTW having lower O&D than markets of similar size? No fallacy at all. Larger O&D markets get more service, plain and simple. Not sure why every response to one of my posts has to involve MSP (and MSP still has more O&D than DTW and carried more passengers, while being a smaller metro area, sorry... ). It's a reason why DTW is the new MIA of a.net. Every thread devolves into a bitter back and forth.

Jeremy

Again Detroit's O/D are a bit skewed because you have two airports that are within driving distance from Detroit where there is leakage MSP has zero markets the can reasonably drive to so there is very little if any leakage as far as O/D numbers go. Please provide the numbers of O/D numbers for MSP and DTW

SESGDL wrote:

And what does that have to do with DTW having lower O&D than markets of similar size? No fallacy at all. Larger O&D markets get more service, plain and simple. Not sure why every response to one of my posts has to involve MSP (and MSP still has more O&D than DTW and carried more passengers, while being a smaller metro area, sorry... ). It's a reason why DTW is the new MIA of a.net. Every thread devolves into a bitter back and forth.

Jeremy

What does DTW's O/D have anything to do with markets of similar size? Again, that is nothing more than a.net nonsense -- O/D is LOOSELY correlated to population, there are many other driving factors. MCO & LAS have incredibly high O/D for their population size -- because their O/D has little to do with population. MSP, DEN & SLC have historically had O/D significantly higher than comparable communities to the East -- because the anchor remote regions of the country in which ground transportation often isn't an attractive or viable option. MSP SHOULD have higher O/D, because it has a de facto monopoly on the Upper Midwest and attracts tens of thousands of people willing to drive for lower fares. This is why MSP's O/D hasn't kept up with the local economy and LCC service (and enabled DTW to close the gap, despite the different directions of the economies) -- as neighboring communities in the Upper Midwest have gained (cheaper) service, there's been less incentive to drive to MSP.

It you compare DTW's O/D, per capita, to other comparable communities throughout the Lower Midwest and into the South, it certain holds its weight (and is often above average). And that's in spite of the fact that DTW has transitioned into one the highest yielding, least competitive medium/large markets in the country.

And DTW is hardly the "new MIA" of a.net. DTW discussions are largely contained to the the DTW discussion thread, sans one person. Back then, EVERY thread was hijacked into a MIA thread by a small group of posters. And for many years, YOU were part of an MSP fan base that regularly started numerous threads complaining about the scope & size of the hub, and how you hated DTW because it was holding MSP back Sound familiar?

klm617 wrote:

Again Detroit's O/D are a bit skewed because you have two airports that are within driving distance from Detroit where there is leakage MSP has zero markets the can reasonably drive to so there is very little if any leakage as far as O/D numbers go. Please provide the numbers of O/D numbers for MSP and DTW

Because of the way O/D is recorded by the DOT, ALL O/D numbers are skewed, but in the grand scheme of things, the raw number leads to viable comparisons.

Sure, DTW leaks international passengers to ORD & YYZ.. but it picks up (largely domestic) from throughout Michigan, Northwest Ohio and Southern Ontario. GRR & CLE grew by a staggering 1M enplanements in recent years, and you can handily bet that a solid portion of that came from people who previously drove to DTW (e.g. NW Ohio).

compensateme wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Again Detroit's O/D are a bit skewed because you have two airports that are within driving distance from Detroit where there is leakage MSP has zero markets the can reasonably drive to so there is very little if any leakage as far as O/D numbers go. Please provide the numbers of O/D numbers for MSP and DTW

Because of the way O/D is recorded by the DOT, ALL O/D numbers are skewed, but in the grand scheme of things, the raw number leads to viable comparisons.

Sure, DTW leaks international passengers to ORD & YYZ.. but it picks up (largely domestic) from throughout Michigan, Northwest Ohio and Southern Ontario. GRR & CLE grew by a staggering 1M enplanements in recent years, and you can handily bet that a solid portion of that came from people who previously drove to DTW (e.g. NW Ohio).

You are completely correct so perhaps we gain as many as we lose. I am sure that Southwest Ontario contributes a lot to the Detroit Florida numbers